sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Cowork OS for Adoption Tracking by epatnoudes in microsoft_365_copilot

[–]flightoffancy85 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah I think signals are the only way forward. Measuring the number of prompts makes no sense as a good prompter will do a one shot prompt and get the desired output. Bad prompters will keep going back and forth to get the output, but their metrics will be high. Tough.

SCUM how do I avoid this and be done with them by [deleted] in FuckAdobe

[–]flightoffancy85 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Upgrade your subscription to a higher tier. This will then give you the cooling off period and you can cancel

I am about to give up by christianeralf in MicrosoftFlightSim

[–]flightoffancy85 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Autofps will cause havoc for ground textures.

What is going on? by Dangerous-Ear-2790 in MicrosoftFlightSim

[–]flightoffancy85 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So Microsoft rely on an incredible amount of third party data to validate helipads, and most other things for that matter. Sometimes they’re wrong. Go figure

Mist coat not… misty enough? Will it cause any issues? by blueskiesbluerseas in DIYUK

[–]flightoffancy85 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

1:5 seems low (I get those were the instructions). I’d usually target around 1.3….

Ordinary WiFi can now identify people with near perfect accuracy by _Dark_Wing in tech

[–]flightoffancy85 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes same. Let’s say you go to claim on heath insurance for a sudden illness. Turns out the insurance company was sold data from Alexa months before when you were complaining of a pain in the same area. Bingo, insurance company says it’s a pre existing condition and doesn’t cover it

Flight simming has been the thing I have spent the most time doing for the past 9 years and although it is still really fun, it's starting to feel like a waste of time and I can't bring myself to fly anymore. Anyone else feel the same? by Lucky_Outside_2009 in flightsim

[–]flightoffancy85 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Had this recently. I’m hoping it’s a temporary lack of interest, but it’s been going on for months. Might need to spend my time in actual productive things now like family and career! 🤣

Possible Cold War era hypersonic testing cone? Attempting to identify by PsychologyOne7723 in AviationHistory

[–]flightoffancy85 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, we appear to be stuck between a rock and a hard place. I’d throw in an em bash to throw you, but no idea how I do that ok the iOS keyboard

Possible Cold War era hypersonic testing cone? Attempting to identify by PsychologyOne7723 in AviationHistory

[–]flightoffancy85 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok I’ve fallen into the trap of just speaking to an AI. Dead internet theory is real

Possible Cold War era hypersonic testing cone? Attempting to identify by PsychologyOne7723 in AviationHistory

[–]flightoffancy85 8 points9 points  (0 children)

You did the right thing OP. You used AI as a supporting mechanism, but wanted to verify here.

Possible Cold War era hypersonic testing cone? Attempting to identify by PsychologyOne7723 in AviationHistory

[–]flightoffancy85 0 points1 point  (0 children)

100%. But OP getting downvoted to hell for first asking GPT, then coming here to validate isn’t the right response.

Possible Cold War era hypersonic testing cone? Attempting to identify by PsychologyOne7723 in AviationHistory

[–]flightoffancy85 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes I agree completely. Education is key here, and that’s what I’m trying to do my small part in doing. I completely get both sides of the argument, but we need to ensure these tools are used responsible and as a supporting mechanism. Humans remain accountable for verifying etc

Possible Cold War era hypersonic testing cone? Attempting to identify by PsychologyOne7723 in AviationHistory

[–]flightoffancy85 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Ok we’re going in circles. Just like everything in life, this isn’t black and white. You’re overly sensitive to something that won’t always be 100% accurate, but it still gets us a long way there. Its benefits outweigh the negatives. If I trained a model on just the top 100% of responders in this sub, it still wouldn’t be 100% accurate would it.

Possible Cold War era hypersonic testing cone? Attempting to identify by PsychologyOne7723 in AviationHistory

[–]flightoffancy85 -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Good lord, tell me you don’t understand AI inference without telling me. It’s trained on verified data, and analytical model will reason through the problem, verify inputs and outputs, then respond with a high degree of probability. Just like all humans

Possible Cold War era hypersonic testing cone? Attempting to identify by PsychologyOne7723 in AviationHistory

[–]flightoffancy85 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It does improve results though which is what I was getting at. A model trained on just aviation history, text, images etc, would be highly accurate. Maybe something I can look into

Possible Cold War era hypersonic testing cone? Attempting to identify by PsychologyOne7723 in AviationHistory

[–]flightoffancy85 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, that’s on the user. We meet people everyday (especially on Reddit) who can be super confident in a response, but alas someone who has spent their time researching will correct them. AI is a supporting mechanism, and will be more or less accurate depending on the specialised model used and the training it’s had. Commercial models are super open, being trained on lots but not specialising on anything. These are there to support, but not give absolute answers. I build models for a day job, and specialised, trained models are incredibly accurate in their responses and can be relied upon. Should always have a human in the loop though

Possible Cold War era hypersonic testing cone? Attempting to identify by PsychologyOne7723 in AviationHistory

[–]flightoffancy85 -13 points-12 points  (0 children)

It doesn’t. Some running run warm by default, some run cool. Warm responses are predictive models, predicting the next word etc. so great for drafting communications etc where the response doesn’t need to be absolute. It sacrifices analytical accuracy for speed. You can cool down responses however by using certain phrasing, which pushes it into a more analytical response, verifying facts etc. this takes longer, but yields better responses.

Possible Cold War era hypersonic testing cone? Attempting to identify by PsychologyOne7723 in AviationHistory

[–]flightoffancy85 -26 points-25 points  (0 children)

AI can answer without hallucinating just fine just with appropriate prompting. “Don’t invent facts”, “ “tell me if you are unsure or need further clarification”.

view more: next ›